Windows 2000 was a great OS when it came out. It was reliable, ran good, and it wasn't half-dos based like 95/98/ME. I remember so many headaches with having to reinstall Windows 95 every month because of some issue.
Windows XP was a fantastic follow-up to 2000 and Vista was also a good, reliable OS that I used for 2 years without having to reinstall it ever.
Windows 7 is basically like what Windows 95 did with Windows 3.11 by dumbing it down for the general population.
@davejoshmom1 the design looks good, but microsoft needs to remember that people dont all have touch screens, swiping gestures arent that useful when you have a mouse
@CandaceGertrudeFlynn I'll guess you'll have to ask Microsoft about that. The obvious reason is that they want people to switch to Windows Vista or 7, and saving money on support.
However, on a philosophical note, why should anything as complete as Windows 2000 undergo major changes (sometimes for the worse, read: Vista)? As long as it does it's job, I don't see any reason to change it unless the changes makes it better at what it does.
@CandaceGertrudeFlynn Because it's obsolete, and Microsoft said in June 2005 that they were ending the standard support for Windows 2000 ended and that it would be extended 5 years until July 2010 including only paid support and updates.
They have to, since you may get exposed to viruses. Unless if you have antivirus software. Another cause is that they are obsolete. But for other users that love WINDOWS 2000. it's like Windows 7 classic theme.
@MuCTePCuCaDMuH Because Windows XP is a "special case" for the fact that when Microsoft was developing Longhorn (early Windows Vista), they had a delay of 3 years when they realized about creep featurism, and for Windows XP it meant an extension of its lifetime since it was the most recent release while Windows 2000 was older and was already set to last 10 years.The Longhorn delay of 3 years meant that Windows XP lifetime instead of being 10 years would be 3 additional years, making it 13 years.
@TheVistaLover Actually, you only need a version of Windows 2000. And a copy of Parallels or Virtual PC. The so-called virtual disk you need is acually just free space on your disk :)
@93axele Actually, we're still using it where i work. Our cashiers runs on a Windows 2000 server off site. And to be nice, lets just say that Windows 2000 is the last thing that breaks in our system.
@89990000 Actually, it is often considered by many to be the most stable version of Windows ever made. I use it for my server still after all these years and had no problems with it. WIN2K FOREVER!
im using windows 7 but it isnt so easy or good to run but my dad stilll has a windows xp desktop and it is so easy to use and the performance is much better then the windows 7
@famouswolfy Yes you are right. But you're not talking about Active Desktop, the feature that let you put webpages as portions or entire desktop backgrounds.
@davejoshmom1 yeah but that difference is the difference between French Vanilla and regular vanilla ice cream. Drivers between the two and most programs can be compiled and run by Windows 2000 and Windows XP. Windows XP is with a few improvements, like the Fisher Price Interface, system restore, etc...... Sure one is still more in use. Had Windows XP not been a consumer OS, it would have probably suffered a similar fate like NT 4.0.
Its one of the older ones the newest OS is Windows 7 I use windows 7 works way better Vista sucked and Xp was good I run Xp on my other computer and about to update it to windows 7
@jamesoleruster I run Windows 2000 on my Windows XP era laptop, this version runs much better than Xp itself, Windows XP and 2000 are the same , just one has the fancy paint over it!
About that fancy paint. It isn't so fancy because it has to be MS signed to use, making just paint, and of course to get real customization, you need to get an UXTheme hack or Object Desktop. I hate the UXTheme because it can fuck up your system, and I hate Object Desktop for 2 reasons, 1. to get the most, you need THOUSANDS of other programs, taking up more space than Godzilla in a fucking closet, and two, I HATE SHAREWARE/TRIALS!!!!!! Why doesn't MS offer more customization? WHY??
@jamesoleruster No it is not really fancy anymore but back in 2001 it was. 3rd party theme programs had another disadvantage, more RAM and CPU usage. Windows 2000 and Windows XP are virtually the same. Microsoft's excuse of not continuing more updates in the near future is because, Microsoft is bitching that Windows 2000/XP was a success and not Windows Me and Vista.
Some servers still use Windows 2000 and not Windows Server 2003 and Windows 20008
Urgh I hated Windows 2000! My system always crashed when I left it on (for instance to run certain maintenance programs or to avoid having to take the time to boot up when I knew I'd want to be on the computer first thing when I got home from school, or in the morning when I woke up... Or to play music so I could sleep without thinking of bad things. Upgrading to XP solved that problem in it's entirety.
Excellent and weird commercial. Does anyone know which SONG it is? As someone else commented below, it is difficult to find by searching for the lyrics.
so have computers always had internet or did they come at a later time becuse the way i hear it older computers were just for games and and applications?
All windows versions since Windows 95 could change the background picture. Before that, you could only change between some colors or a background pattern I think.
But it's annoying to have a background on Win2k and lower because the icon text isn't transparent with the background or whatever. I think it's called icon backdrop in windows xp.
I know ha. But honestly Apple started it and I'm not sure Microsoft ever made an offensive come back. As for Apple, ALL the come backs were offensive. You should see how they replied to Microsoft responding to the Mac vs PC ads.
Windows Vista is the most advanced OS on the planet (except Windows 7). If you think OS X is anywhere near it with its Unix open-source underlay and few engines stabilizing it, you have no idea about how it really works.
Of course you can, but I'm not saying that Windows is less advanced than Mac OS X or any UNIX version. Microsoft actually does a good job with Windows, keeping in mind all the different systems they have to support.
I'm just pointing out that it's wrong to say that Windows is a way more advanced OS than Mac OS X or any UNIX version. And at the same time, when you post such a strong accusation, wouldn't you say that it's a good idea to put some real one-on-one facts along with it?
You have a point, but the reason why I said that Windows is most advanced is because of its ability to be manipulated so much. It preserves the user-friendliness of a home/office environment, but still has the ability to be broken down to core values and set up in any way that you want, essentially being able to change anything in any application or the OS itself if you know what you're doing in the registry or hard drive files.
Windows takes user-friendliness to a whole different level: to the point of "A problem has detected and Windows has been shutdown to prevent damage to yor computer".
At least try to understand what you're talking about before you say something completely stupid. The BSOD happens because there's a hardware error, since Windows runs on such a huge variety of hardware it's very hard to keep it in tact. Not to mention, with Vista BSOD doesn't really happen. None in my 2-year experience. Also, this has nothing to do with the GUI...
"Hardware error". Oh. And why no similar error occurs in other systems? Instead of talking nonsense, try searching a little. Changing the subject a bit, are you following me? I respond to your comments on this same subject.
Like what systems? Macs? Macs only run on their own configured hardware. Linux? If you've ever used Linux that shit messes up all the time. Once it got its video driver corrupted, all I saw was color lines all over my screen when I booted it up. Windows is superior in this case. So please, YOU go ahead and do the research. At least I've used all of these systems.
Macs run only on their configured hardware. Yes. They probably crash less because of that.
"If you've ever used Linux that shit messes up all the time." Have you tested more than one distribution of Linux? There are many, and I doubt that it happens at all. At least I've used all of these systems too.
I've used, not installed, Debian, and I've personally installed and had several versions of Ubuntu on my computer, so my experiences would mainly be from Ubuntu, which from what I hear is supposed to be the best as far as being user friendly. I've had too many problems with Ubuntu to list, and it really requires a lot of patience to resolve most of them.
hey come on retards can use a computer too! thats why mac was made to keep the money off retards so they can surf for porn. vista is ok. but i profer windows xp mce
Then came Xp, Still to this day a lot of ppl use it cause it was and still is a good Os, then came the Horibad Vista, Sp1 made things a tad better now. And yet, now we wait for W-7
rock solid?, you must be mistaken because last time I checked OSX 10.0 from the 2000 era SUCKED HORRIBLY, granite it is stable but no more than it's windows counterpart.
so what if the VERY 1st version of OS X wasnt the best. . ... just like with the current version of OS X, 10.0 was based on the NeXT step OS which was a VERY VERY stable OS and it just took a bit of time to make OS X stable too!
hah? when did i say that? what i said earlier was stating a fact that even if OS X 1.0 seemed a bit dodgey at 1st, it was still good coz it was based on a VERY stable OS and over time Apple have improved OS X... all i was saying is they have improved Mac OS X.. what r u go'n on bout?
OS X really wasn't refined until 10.3 (10.0-10.2 were still really buggy and lacked features). Windows 95, 98SE, and 2000 were all great OS's in their prime-times, with each new release bringing stability. XP still is in its prime-time, and based on the opinions (my own and in the tech world) of Windows 7, the time is soon for another Windows edition to see its prime-time.
yea well, it's understandable that Mac OS X took some time to get right but XP is no different... it was only with SP2 when XP was usable... yea, windows 7 might see prime time but im pretty sure vista has done alot of damage to MS and has put alot of people off from windows coz of vista...... if win7 ends up being good, it'll only be bcoz of the special xp mode that win7 has.. without that, i doubt 7 will do much better than vista.......
Vista didn't do NEAR as much damage as websites, blogposts, and APPLE ADS have made some people beleive. Windows Vista sold more copies in it's first month of being released than any other version had before. And with Service Pack 2, the OS is quite stable.
dont u get it? vista was a repeat of the x360 launch! everyone were expecting the WOW factor when both products came out but only delivered disappointment to alot of people .. and yes, both the 360 n vista are better now but they were both pretty bad when they launched... yea, ive used vista with sp2 n i still think its slow as hell compared to Mac OS X Leopard n im not just saying that !
I use Windows Vista on my desktop PC and leopard on my MacBook Pro. They both have their Pros and their Cons, and I can't find any reason to say one is better than the other. They both have their strangths and their weaknesses. All the crap about Vista being slow is form people who run it on....slow computers!
naa actually i had vista running on my friend's laptop that he'd only just bought at the beginning of this year and yes, it was brand new...... yes, i have to admit that OS X has its cons as well but you have to remember that vista has its title "worst OS in history" for a reason you know!... and no, i didnt just make that up!
I use a dual core with windows 2000. Beats all the rest with its easy to use interface and gaming friendly memory consumption. I don't need to worry about lagging or crap on windows 2000. It's either Linux or windows 2000 for me/
i wanna pimped out tractor =D
spongeyperson1000 3 weeks ago
Windows 2000 was a great OS when it came out. It was reliable, ran good, and it wasn't half-dos based like 95/98/ME. I remember so many headaches with having to reinstall Windows 95 every month because of some issue.
Windows XP was a fantastic follow-up to 2000 and Vista was also a good, reliable OS that I used for 2 years without having to reinstall it ever.
Windows 7 is basically like what Windows 95 did with Windows 3.11 by dumbing it down for the general population.
ComeAndSeevX 2 months ago
@ComeAndSeevX I'd use Windows 2000 whenever I have the chance, even today.
But I don't have the chance!
OSDolphin 3 days ago
@davejoshmom1 the design looks good, but microsoft needs to remember that people dont all have touch screens, swiping gestures arent that useful when you have a mouse
siriusgamer 2 months ago
@davejoshmom1 i didnt see the preview 1 month ago...
siriusgamer 2 months ago
Still using 2000 (And ME) today. It's compatible with the past, present and a good part of the future.
larewwedxhhh19 3 months ago
@davejoshmom1 Idiot.
SportaMega 3 months ago
@davejoshmom1 lol windows 8 isnt out yet smart one.
siriusgamer 4 months ago
Still using windows 2000
MrGhostface2001 5 months ago
MICROSOFT...I HATE xbox and I love Sony vaio and ps3
MJL600000 5 months ago
Im running windows 95 right now and it is aweso.....I mean about to crash.
MJL600000 5 months ago
windows xp is good enough, 2000 is just very outdated in today's computing world. Internet viruses and worms easily exploit xp nonetheless 2000.
2fast4uspartan 5 months ago
ah yes.... my childhood OS. good times
SporeFan01234 5 months ago
I was 1 when windows 2000 came out and for some reason i can mind this ad
11mrewan 6 months ago
I'm running XP.
CandaceGertrudeFlynn 6 months ago
whats the name of the song in the commercial?
xarhsgew 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
WINDOWS 7 FTW
yoyojamesinthehouse 8 months ago
Windows 2000 maybe its ended by Service Pack 4 but the next pack service of Windows 2000 Service Pack 5
MrArnejoJoshua 8 months ago
@MrArnejoJoshua Actually, Windows NT 4.0 made it all the way to Service Pack 6. Another fun fact is that Windows 2000 is NT 5.0 and XP is NT 5.1.
devothj 8 months ago
@devothj Why did support end on July 13 2010? A lot of people loved it.
CandaceGertrudeFlynn 6 months ago
@CandaceGertrudeFlynn I'll guess you'll have to ask Microsoft about that. The obvious reason is that they want people to switch to Windows Vista or 7, and saving money on support.
However, on a philosophical note, why should anything as complete as Windows 2000 undergo major changes (sometimes for the worse, read: Vista)? As long as it does it's job, I don't see any reason to change it unless the changes makes it better at what it does.
devothj 6 months ago
@CandaceGertrudeFlynn Because it's obsolete, and Microsoft said in June 2005 that they were ending the standard support for Windows 2000 ended and that it would be extended 5 years until July 2010 including only paid support and updates.
SportaMega 3 months ago
Windows 2000 has DIESEL POWER!
an65001 8 months ago
dude, thaz a good beat!
billgatesxD 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
THIS COMMERCIAL IS JUST TOO GOOD
tippete123 9 months ago
I cannot fucking believe that Microsoft cancelled its support.
MuCTePCuCaDMuH 9 months ago
@MuCTePCuCaDMuH
They have to, since you may get exposed to viruses. Unless if you have antivirus software. Another cause is that they are obsolete. But for other users that love WINDOWS 2000. it's like Windows 7 classic theme.
89990000 9 months ago
@MuCTePCuCaDMuH Because W2000 is Old!
tweetyaja 8 months ago
@tweetyaja XP too! 10 years old to! and it will be alive for 3 years more! so why?
MuCTePCuCaDMuH 8 months ago
@MuCTePCuCaDMuH Because Windows XP is a "special case" for the fact that when Microsoft was developing Longhorn (early Windows Vista), they had a delay of 3 years when they realized about creep featurism, and for Windows XP it meant an extension of its lifetime since it was the most recent release while Windows 2000 was older and was already set to last 10 years.The Longhorn delay of 3 years meant that Windows XP lifetime instead of being 10 years would be 3 additional years, making it 13 years.
SportaMega 3 months ago
that song isn't really microsoft...
mittenscat620 9 months ago
I NEED A VIRTUAL HARD DISK
TheVistaLover 9 months ago
@TheVistaLover Actually, you only need a version of Windows 2000. And a copy of Parallels or Virtual PC. The so-called virtual disk you need is acually just free space on your disk :)
devothj 9 months ago
Windows 2000 was awesome. XP was shit. Vista was shit. 7 is awesome.
SimHarrison 10 months ago
@SimHarrison
2000 was awesome but XP was shit? Are you high? haha
TheAudioOfBeing 9 months ago
@SimHarrison
2000 was awesome but XP is not shit. XP is the most-sold OS from Microsoft. Maybe it's your computer which says XP is shit.
89990000 9 months ago
@89990000 I'm running XP.
SimHarrison 9 months ago
@SimHarrison I 100% agree.
an65001 8 months ago
@GiglaysTheMany no he said from
MasterOfMonopoly 10 months ago
I am on Windows 2000 right now
DoReMiForever 11 months ago
@GigaysTheManly: I think it's more like, "From the boondocks". Never thought about it though.
devothj 11 months ago
did it just say "Fuck the Boondocks!!" at 0:09?
GigaysTheManly 11 months ago
i'm using it right now... runs just great after 11 years =)
93axele 11 months ago 14
@93axele Actually, we're still using it where i work. Our cashiers runs on a Windows 2000 server off site. And to be nice, lets just say that Windows 2000 is the last thing that breaks in our system.
devothj 11 months ago
@devothj Yeah.
an65001 8 months ago
Windows 2000 is sucks.
89990000 11 months ago
@89990000 XP sucks Vista sucks 7 sucks
DoReMiForever 11 months ago
@DoReMiForever wow...
kalenbooten 10 months ago
@89990000 Actually, it is often considered by many to be the most stable version of Windows ever made. I use it for my server still after all these years and had no problems with it. WIN2K FOREVER!
OldSchoolTechGeek 10 months ago
@XareSoft do u like ubuntu
linux
MasterOfMonopoly 11 months ago
im using windows 7 but it isnt so easy or good to run but my dad stilll has a windows xp desktop and it is so easy to use and the performance is much better then the windows 7
treadlight1234 1 year ago
oh i had win98 then 2000, xp, and now i have LINUX :D
XareSoft 1 year ago
PCs and Macs should join up for a fantastic machine compatible with everything.
ThorpePark1000 1 year ago 8
damn. i've only had xp and windows 7 professional
Loganiz1337 1 year ago
@famouswolfy Yes you are right. But you're not talking about Active Desktop, the feature that let you put webpages as portions or entire desktop backgrounds.
devothj 1 year ago
@famouswolfy Windows 95 did definitly not have Active Desktop. It was introduced with Windows 98 and was acutally not default in the 98 SE version.
devothj 1 year ago
weird commercial
sinand99 1 year ago
As you can see, Windows commercials don't say Macs are worthless. All Apple does is make Windows seem like a piece of crap OS, when it isn't :/
MrCr80man 1 year ago 2
@davejoshmom1 yeah but that difference is the difference between French Vanilla and regular vanilla ice cream. Drivers between the two and most programs can be compiled and run by Windows 2000 and Windows XP. Windows XP is with a few improvements, like the Fisher Price Interface, system restore, etc...... Sure one is still more in use. Had Windows XP not been a consumer OS, it would have probably suffered a similar fate like NT 4.0.
nextstep333 1 year ago
im glad he crashed into a house with no windows.... wait. did he?
biglippy36 1 year ago
best windows commercial, ever.
brianredneckct 1 year ago
me windows 7
viciado555 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
just spreading the word, Windows 2000 Sucks
ih8Windows2000 1 year ago
@ih8Windows2000 I hate Windows 7!
DoReMiForever 11 months ago
@davejoshmom1 Windows 2000 is the Future
DoReMiForever 1 year ago
I have alll my disks from the old versions of Microsoft, I have Windows 7 now ^_^ And it can play Crysis! EPIC
ENDORPHINSAM 1 year ago
what song is that?
theDavidShorts 1 year ago
@theDavidShorts That song is probably custom made for this commercial. At least I never found it.
devothj 1 year ago
I am on Windows 2000 right now
it works fine, just my pc is slow.
DoReMiForever 1 year ago
@DoReMiForever
Congrats... |-.-|
Tombuutkamp2000 1 year ago
@Tombuutkamp2000
DO you think Windows XP sucks or not? Just asking.
89990000 9 months ago
@89990000
no, i dont
Tombuutkamp2000 9 months ago
I have never watched this commercial before!
jhnri4 1 year ago
bad commercial for good system
PescaPop 1 year ago
@SuperEvilSquid fuck 2010, 2000 forever
DoReMiForever 1 year ago 2
WHAT
ALXXMaXX 1 year ago
WHAT
0Angel0A 1 year ago
@0Angel0A Oh god, we made the exact same comment! :P
ALXXMaXX 1 year ago
@ALXXMaXX
Interesting.
0Angel0A 1 year ago
this was a great OS! Windows 2000 and Windows XP was the best!
KaxiLaxi 1 year ago
I'm the 56.000th yay
abs1296 1 year ago
hay guys window 2000 is old but its extremely stable i use pentium 3 733EB MMX i dual bot ubuntu 7.04 with it
MultiYippee 1 year ago
haha very funny >: (
pkm2209 1 year ago
Windows 2000 rulezzzz!!!
Aqwert76 1 year ago 2
Is Windows 200 the latest or one of the old ones
pkm2209 1 year ago
Its one of the older ones the newest OS is Windows 7 I use windows 7 works way better Vista sucked and Xp was good I run Xp on my other computer and about to update it to windows 7
dhaltonmorris 1 year ago
Comment removed
MapleStoryP 1 year ago
This video made me install Windows 2000 Pro on my laptop. And, well, almost NO BSODs. Thank you for uploading.
SBS9067A 1 year ago 2
I loved Windows 2000
DrG241 1 year ago 28
@DrG241 pretty fast on new computer that used to run XP, an XP who kicked me out because I didn't have my friggin license key.
jamesoleruster 1 year ago
@jamesoleruster I run Windows 2000 on my Windows XP era laptop, this version runs much better than Xp itself, Windows XP and 2000 are the same , just one has the fancy paint over it!
nextstep333 1 year ago
About that fancy paint. It isn't so fancy because it has to be MS signed to use, making just paint, and of course to get real customization, you need to get an UXTheme hack or Object Desktop. I hate the UXTheme because it can fuck up your system, and I hate Object Desktop for 2 reasons, 1. to get the most, you need THOUSANDS of other programs, taking up more space than Godzilla in a fucking closet, and two, I HATE SHAREWARE/TRIALS!!!!!! Why doesn't MS offer more customization? WHY??
jamesoleruster 1 year ago
@jamesoleruster No it is not really fancy anymore but back in 2001 it was. 3rd party theme programs had another disadvantage, more RAM and CPU usage. Windows 2000 and Windows XP are virtually the same. Microsoft's excuse of not continuing more updates in the near future is because, Microsoft is bitching that Windows 2000/XP was a success and not Windows Me and Vista.
Some servers still use Windows 2000 and not Windows Server 2003 and Windows 20008
nextstep333 1 year ago
@DrG241 Me too, it was (yeah, it was) a great operating system, that's why it's the father of Windows XP :P
Now I have Windows 2000 Server running in a virtual machine, just to remember the old great days ;) My primary OS is Windows Vista SP2 :D :D haha
Best regards from Peru!
sodaxp 1 year ago
@DrG241
Windows 2000 was awesome, really stable with sp4 as well :)
vikingsmb 1 year ago
Me too.
SBS9067A 1 year ago
Urgh I hated Windows 2000! My system always crashed when I left it on (for instance to run certain maintenance programs or to avoid having to take the time to boot up when I knew I'd want to be on the computer first thing when I got home from school, or in the morning when I woke up... Or to play music so I could sleep without thinking of bad things. Upgrading to XP solved that problem in it's entirety.
punkrockgoth1988 1 year ago
0:07 is the best part lol microsoft needs to make more commercials like this
matthewdixon1993 1 year ago 2
Otis and dover elevators!
an65001 1 year ago
0:13 is the the best part !!
GabMesIRT 1 year ago 2
do you still use it now? :) on what computer
DBZmusicboy01 1 year ago
I don't really get it.
MapleStoryP 2 years ago
windows 2000 is gangsta
GamingPalooza 2 years ago 2
cool! I do too!!!
Windows2000 on the netbook
XP at school
Vista/Ubuntu Linux on the desktop
and
7 at school!
mrfoxboy 2 years ago
Excellent and weird commercial. Does anyone know which SONG it is? As someone else commented below, it is difficult to find by searching for the lyrics.
ralfhedenhos 2 years ago
so have computers always had internet or did they come at a later time becuse the way i hear it older computers were just for games and and applications?
TheFunkyMonkeyClub 2 years ago
google is your friend.
phpboxxx 2 years ago
lol wut?
TheFunkyMonkeyClub 2 years ago
cool
lancededcena123 2 years ago
could you not change the backround on any of the windows os's before xp??
Drewbie96 2 years ago
All windows versions since Windows 95 could change the background picture. Before that, you could only change between some colors or a background pattern I think.
devothj 2 years ago
actually win 3.1 can also change background look in the control panel
mikebhasi 2 years ago
3.0 can too
Windows7IsCool 2 years ago
But it's annoying to have a background on Win2k and lower because the icon text isn't transparent with the background or whatever. I think it's called icon backdrop in windows xp.
secret00agent00man 2 years ago
devothj, ha you don't use windows 3.11 more? i do you can chance more in that
DoReMiJunkee 2 years ago
No, it's a while ago, but i still got the disks and it runs in VirtualPC. Still, I'm not so sure about the desktop "features" :)
But I -could- use it. I could actually survive with DOS as long as it could run a good web browser ;)
devothj 2 years ago
@devothj
Haha you mean DOS?
DOS was a AKA command line xD
It did not got Internet Explorer 8 or somethng, It can only run TrashBrowser xD
No seriusly, its fucking trash.
Tombuutkamp2000 1 year ago
@devothj NT 3.5 and 3.51 had the ability to changed the desktop picture.
nextstep333 1 year ago
yep. all he way since 3.1
bealieuboys 2 years ago
the BSOD is irritating me now. -_-
I wish we can remove this
BoogsterSU2 2 years ago
Seriously... why can't PCs and Macs just live in harmony...
Hauntzor 2 years ago 38
They can: Macs run Windows.
11010neo01011 2 years ago
I know ha. But honestly Apple started it and I'm not sure Microsoft ever made an offensive come back. As for Apple, ALL the come backs were offensive. You should see how they replied to Microsoft responding to the Mac vs PC ads.
shion366 2 years ago 2
@Hauntzor
They can!
Ever heard of Boot Camp for Mac OS X?
MajorasTriforce 1 year ago
@Hauntzor They do if they are networked.
nextstep333 1 year ago
How does this advertise Windows 2000?! XD
LadybugGamer 2 years ago
Looking for a window for to the new economy? Windows 2000 is the window for you... :)
devothj 2 years ago
windows 7 is better than vista and i love windows 7
(im a long beta tester)
i use windows.
but saying that windows is the most advanced one is stupid.
it all depends on how you use your OS
and for what :D
masterpj55 2 years ago
best windows commercial ever!
2000 is the 2nd best version of windows ever! only second to XP!
98se I think is fair to say is the 3rd best version of windows
bluesniper345 2 years ago
Linux Ubuntu 9.04
Sketchy144 2 years ago 2
Windows Vista is the most advanced OS on the planet (except Windows 7). If you think OS X is anywhere near it with its Unix open-source underlay and few engines stabilizing it, you have no idea about how it really works.
PoliticalHell 2 years ago
Please, please take a moment, and look up some information on what you are talking about before you post such a misleading comment :)
devothj 2 years ago
I could say the same to you.
PoliticalHell 2 years ago
Of course you can, but I'm not saying that Windows is less advanced than Mac OS X or any UNIX version. Microsoft actually does a good job with Windows, keeping in mind all the different systems they have to support.
I'm just pointing out that it's wrong to say that Windows is a way more advanced OS than Mac OS X or any UNIX version. And at the same time, when you post such a strong accusation, wouldn't you say that it's a good idea to put some real one-on-one facts along with it?
devothj 2 years ago
You have a point, but the reason why I said that Windows is most advanced is because of its ability to be manipulated so much. It preserves the user-friendliness of a home/office environment, but still has the ability to be broken down to core values and set up in any way that you want, essentially being able to change anything in any application or the OS itself if you know what you're doing in the registry or hard drive files.
PoliticalHell 2 years ago
User-friendliness? Take a look at Mac OS X.
11010neo01011 2 years ago
Mac takes user-friendliness to a whole different level: to the point of "hey I'm for computer illiterates and general retards".
PoliticalHell 2 years ago
Windows takes user-friendliness to a whole different level: to the point of "A problem has detected and Windows has been shutdown to prevent damage to yor computer".
11010neo01011 2 years ago
At least try to understand what you're talking about before you say something completely stupid. The BSOD happens because there's a hardware error, since Windows runs on such a huge variety of hardware it's very hard to keep it in tact. Not to mention, with Vista BSOD doesn't really happen. None in my 2-year experience. Also, this has nothing to do with the GUI...
PoliticalHell 2 years ago
"Hardware error". Oh. And why no similar error occurs in other systems? Instead of talking nonsense, try searching a little. Changing the subject a bit, are you following me? I respond to your comments on this same subject.
11010neo01011 2 years ago
Like what systems? Macs? Macs only run on their own configured hardware. Linux? If you've ever used Linux that shit messes up all the time. Once it got its video driver corrupted, all I saw was color lines all over my screen when I booted it up. Windows is superior in this case. So please, YOU go ahead and do the research. At least I've used all of these systems.
What change of subject are you talking about?
PoliticalHell 2 years ago
Macs run only on their configured hardware. Yes. They probably crash less because of that.
"If you've ever used Linux that shit messes up all the time." Have you tested more than one distribution of Linux? There are many, and I doubt that it happens at all. At least I've used all of these systems too.
11010neo01011 2 years ago
I've used, not installed, Debian, and I've personally installed and had several versions of Ubuntu on my computer, so my experiences would mainly be from Ubuntu, which from what I hear is supposed to be the best as far as being user friendly. I've had too many problems with Ubuntu to list, and it really requires a lot of patience to resolve most of them.
PoliticalHell 2 years ago
So, switch to other version that's not Debian or Ubuntu. But Mac still better.
11010neo01011 2 years ago
I would agree that Mac is better by far then any version of Linux.
PoliticalHell 2 years ago
Want to know? I ♥ Apple. And final dot.
11010neo01011 2 years ago
hey come on retards can use a computer too! thats why mac was made to keep the money off retards so they can surf for porn. vista is ok. but i profer windows xp mce
DavidPlim 2 years ago
Comment removed
indyj1698 2 years ago
Yea what he said, death to Apple and free thinking!
Wafflesan 2 years ago
2000 is the best
coolcatevan9 2 years ago 4
this commercial is so funny!
lildave2001 2 years ago
The commercial is funny
LukaelproductionsAB 2 years ago
This is what runs on my laptop. =)
jugglerjohnny 2 years ago
Then came Xp, Still to this day a lot of ppl use it cause it was and still is a good Os, then came the Horibad Vista, Sp1 made things a tad better now. And yet, now we wait for W-7
Acerfan2010 2 years ago
I love Windows 2000. It is really stable.
NotAYTUser 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
u mean, its stable compared to it's predecessors because it still failed compared to rock solid OS X.
aaroninclub 2 years ago
rock solid?, you must be mistaken because last time I checked OSX 10.0 from the 2000 era SUCKED HORRIBLY, granite it is stable but no more than it's windows counterpart.
Dms12444 2 years ago
so what if the VERY 1st version of OS X wasnt the best. . ... just like with the current version of OS X, 10.0 was based on the NeXT step OS which was a VERY VERY stable OS and it just took a bit of time to make OS X stable too!
aaroninclub 2 years ago
so your comparing an OS from 2000 to an OS from 2008 wow that's really fair.
Dms12444 2 years ago
hah? when did i say that? what i said earlier was stating a fact that even if OS X 1.0 seemed a bit dodgey at 1st, it was still good coz it was based on a VERY stable OS and over time Apple have improved OS X... all i was saying is they have improved Mac OS X.. what r u go'n on bout?
aaroninclub 2 years ago
OS X really wasn't refined until 10.3 (10.0-10.2 were still really buggy and lacked features). Windows 95, 98SE, and 2000 were all great OS's in their prime-times, with each new release bringing stability. XP still is in its prime-time, and based on the opinions (my own and in the tech world) of Windows 7, the time is soon for another Windows edition to see its prime-time.
mrivera1 2 years ago
yea well, it's understandable that Mac OS X took some time to get right but XP is no different... it was only with SP2 when XP was usable... yea, windows 7 might see prime time but im pretty sure vista has done alot of damage to MS and has put alot of people off from windows coz of vista...... if win7 ends up being good, it'll only be bcoz of the special xp mode that win7 has.. without that, i doubt 7 will do much better than vista.......
aaroninclub 2 years ago
Vista didn't do NEAR as much damage as websites, blogposts, and APPLE ADS have made some people beleive. Windows Vista sold more copies in it's first month of being released than any other version had before. And with Service Pack 2, the OS is quite stable.
JohnnyDProductions 2 years ago
dont u get it? vista was a repeat of the x360 launch! everyone were expecting the WOW factor when both products came out but only delivered disappointment to alot of people .. and yes, both the 360 n vista are better now but they were both pretty bad when they launched... yea, ive used vista with sp2 n i still think its slow as hell compared to Mac OS X Leopard n im not just saying that !
aaroninclub 2 years ago
I use Windows Vista on my desktop PC and leopard on my MacBook Pro. They both have their Pros and their Cons, and I can't find any reason to say one is better than the other. They both have their strangths and their weaknesses. All the crap about Vista being slow is form people who run it on....slow computers!
Don't YOU get it?
JohnnyDProductions 2 years ago
naa actually i had vista running on my friend's laptop that he'd only just bought at the beginning of this year and yes, it was brand new...... yes, i have to admit that OS X has its cons as well but you have to remember that vista has its title "worst OS in history" for a reason you know!... and no, i didnt just make that up!
aaroninclub 2 years ago
Since when is Vista the worst OS in history?
JohnnyDProductions 2 years ago 2
ummm, since it was launched! just look up "vista worst OS in history" into google... people arent saying its bad for nuthin you know!..
aaroninclub 2 years ago
Well, unlike you, I like to decide things for myself. I don't care if 1,000,000,000 people say "ZOMG VISTA SUX!!!" I decide things for myself.
JohnnyDProductions 2 years ago 2
fair enough ..its just like how I decide to prefer Mac OS X due to its superior stability!
aaroninclub 2 years ago
0% problem with that. The less you rely on microsoft's latest, the less you get exposed to threats.
MirageBistro 2 years ago 4
"Every body is looking for the door to the new economy, but actually, it's a window"
youwe4 2 years ago 12
This has been flagged as spam show
SO??? u think u are so cool u repeated it maybe i should kiss ur ass
wiwq 2 years ago
So you think you're cool because you pointed it out? Maybe I should call you a retard. Retard.
itsawooha 2 years ago 11
I use a dual core with windows 2000. Beats all the rest with its easy to use interface and gaming friendly memory consumption. I don't need to worry about lagging or crap on windows 2000. It's either Linux or windows 2000 for me/
MirageBistro 2 years ago 4
i LOVED windows 7! too bad realtek sucks and can't update their network drivers
vitralizer 2 years ago
Comment removed
mweezy 2 years ago
Windows ME is the worst.
Vista is average.
XP, 2k, and 7 are the best.
Quadunit404 2 years ago 5
Vista is the new ME!!!!
mweezy 2 years ago
Not exactly. Vista doesn't give you the BSOD every 5 or so minutes, unlike Windows ME.
The only real issue with Vista is its speed. It is SLOW. Otherwise it's a fairly average OS.
Quadunit40